SAT/LSAT harder then the MCAT. Hear me out...

[Tyc00nman]

Before you start flaming. Hear me out...

The LSAT/SAT are logic based tests and the MCAT is knowledge based. Knowledge can be acquired over time through hard work and repetition whereas logic is much more innate. Therefore, can it be argued that a "Dumber" person can potentially do well on the MCAT while a smarter person will plateau on the SAT/LSAT?

To better further my argument, you see people increasing MCAT scores by 10-15 points all the time. Rarely do you see a 400 to 500 point increase on the SAT or a 10-15 point increase on the LSAT.

If you can improve your logic...how do you do it?

then is supposed to than in the title btw. lol

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Flaxmoore]

Have you actually taken the MCAT?

I would argue that a majority of the questions are in fact logic-based. Learning how to read the questions/interpret the questions can be just as important as knowing the answer.

Where have you seen a 10-15 point increase on the MCAT? I've seen 5-6, maybe 10 if the person totally changed their focus and study methods, but never 15.

 

[Quix]

Having taken all three (and I'll assume you mean the GRE instead of the SAT, if you want to compare graduate exams), I'm going to go with the MCAT. You can improve logical reasoning by taking courses in deductive and inductive argumentation, critical reasoning, and Sudoku. 😉

 

[LikeClockWork]

Oops. Fed the troll. My bad.

 

[Manyac86]

I had a 16 pt increase from the princeton review diag to the real thing. Although possibly the diag is just a tough test to scare you into taking TPR class.

 

[What up doc]

Okay. I heard you out. Now I can say your ill-founded and baseless ideas are laughable.


In summary:

lol...i agree


but ye, the mcat is a reasoning dude...take it and ull find out...

and SATs were ez as shiit! are u kidding me????? basic math and reading a comprehension....pales in comparison to the MCAT beast!

 

[Bacchus]

I know most, if not all of pre-allo is going to disagree with this post so please keep all comments civil. You're all doing a great job of that right now. Keep up the good work.

 

[bodonid]

The LSAT/SAT are logic based tests and the MCAT is knowledge based. Knowledge can be acquired over time through hard work and repetition whereas logic is much more innate. Therefore, can it be argued that a "Dumber" person can potentially do well on the MCAT while a smarter person will plateau on the SAT/LSAT?

Even if this were true, it has no bearing on the difficulty of the test.

 

[Tyc00nman]

I have taken the LSAT and the Verbal section of the MCAT. The logic game in the LSAT are amongst some of the toughest questions ive ever faced.

 

[1956Goldtop]

I don't really think anyone would contend that the MCAT is purely knowledge based. It is a nice mixture of background knowledge and logical reasoning, and thus some people will have the potential score really high on it but won't because of the lack of studying, and others may never achieve the score they want.

 

[bcat85]

Before you start flaming. Hear me out...

The LSAT/SAT are logic based tests and the MCAT is knowledge based. Knowledge can be acquired over time through hard work and repetition whereas logic is much more innate. Therefore, can it be argued that a "Dumber" person can potentially do well on the MCAT while a smarter person will plateau on the SAT/LSAT?

To better further my argument, you see people increasing MCAT scores by 10-15 points all the time. Rarely do you see a 400 to 500 point increase on the SAT or a 10-15 point increase on the LSAT.

If you can improve your logic...how do you do it?

then is supposed to than in the title btw. lol

Heres the thing... the LSAT and SAT? are logic based, but the MCAT is a logic based test that requires knowledge.👎

 

[bodonid]

I don't see how anyone would measure difficulty using any other standard than time, energy, and money (well, maybe not money) expended. We use more of all three, I think.

Using blanket statements about the superior intellect required to knock the top off of the LSAT (or the inferior intellect of those who would struggle with the LSAT but not the MCAT) is purely anecdotal, and doesn't apply to the general population of people taking the test.

Just throwing you a bone, there, I don't mean to start a flame war (unless you want to, of course)

 

[Tyc00nman]

Heres the thing... the LSAT and SAT? are logic based, but the MCAT is a logic based test that requires knowledge.👎

My argument is: The logic required in the LSAT is compounded in comparison to the MCAT. Thus making it harder.

Like a previous poster stated, the MCAT is VERY knowledge based giving the test taker more of an opportunity to prepare for a better score. Thus making the LSAT harder.

 

[RySerr21]

My argument is: The logic required in the LSAT is compounded in comparison to the MCAT. Thus making it harder.

Like a previous poster stated, the MCAT is VERY knowledge based giving the test taker more of an opportunity to prepare for a better score. Thus making the LSAT harder.

great, the LSAT is harder. being a lawyer would still suck balls.

 

[Carlin]

Yeah, I agree. I've taken the MCAT, and I have a friend who is studying for the LSAT. I was looking through her practice books and some of those questions just made me 😱

 

[Tyc00nman]

great, the LSAT is harder. being a lawyer would still suck balls.

truer words have never been said

 

[bozz]

I agree with the OP. You can't improve logic skills over a period of 3 months.... you just cannot. You can improve your MCAT score drastically over 2-3 months though.

LSAT (maybe even the SAT)>> MCAT

Unlike the LSAT (maybe SAT), I feel that there is no score ceiling for the MCAT. The MCAT doesn't measure any 'innate' skill.
It is much harder to think logically and quickly at the same time, a skill I personally did not really have to use for the MCAT. It's something you develop at a very young age... it's really hard to work on when you're older. IMO the LSAT = IQ test.

 

[Handy388]

don't feed the troll.

 

[bcat85]

great, the LSAT is harder. being a lawyer would still suck balls.

Yes sir. My dad is an attorney, and he actualy forbid me from becoming an attorney because he said it sucks so bad.

 

[Steeler7588]

Not having taken the LSAT, I can't comment. I have taken the SAT, obviously, and it's not really a logic test. Other than the critical reading part of the Verbal, the rest of the exam is knowing basic math principles and vocabulary words. You can go into the SAT without any preparation and ace it, not something you can say for the MCAT.

Also, about increasing your scores - a friend took the SAT in 9th grade and made a ~1040. In 11th grade, he made a ~1440. People increase their SAT scores by a lot quite often.

 

[bodonid]

Yes sir. My dad is an attorney, and he actualy forbid me from becoming an attorney because he said it sucks so bad.

My father is a physician, and while nobody is going to forbid me to do anything, he strongly suggested I go to law school instead of med school.

The problem is, if I became a lawyer, I would have to throw myself in front of a train.

 

[brritscold]

Also, about increasing your scores - a friend took the SAT in 9th grade and made a ~1040. In 11th grade, he made a ~1440. People increase their SAT scores by a lot quite often.

🙄 I think you're missing the influence of something quite important in that score increase, which is... maturity (two years is a lot of time, relatively speaking, for a developing mind). I got a 1210 when I took the SAT in 7th grade, and then a 1600 when I took it for real in 11th grade. Did I do any more focused preparation the second time around to account for the increase? No; in fact, I didn't study at all that time, but I still did better because I was a more developed person intellectually.

I would agree that the logic games section of the LSAT is hard, but saying that it's "harder" than any part of the MCAT is not that useful given how overall, the MCAT and LSAT are different tests covering vastly different skill-sets, and the MCAT doesn't have anything comparable to a logic section. The most direct comparison between the two tests could probably be made between the LSAT's reading comprehension section and the MCAT's verbal reasoning section, and from what I've heard, the LSAT's is harder.

And if you're comparing the MCAT to the SAT... well, I think they both have written essays now, anyway

 

[metalgearHMN]

don't feed the troll.

I'm sorry, I know I shouldn't feed it, but I have to....

OP:

First, I would like to you to learn all of the following topics

* Biology
o Molecular biology
+ Enzymes and metabolism
+ DNA and protein synthesis
+ Eukaryotes
o Genetics
o Microbiology
o Generalized eukaryotic cell
o Specialized eukaryotic cells and tissues
o Nervous and endocrine systems
o Circulatory, lymphatic system, and immune systems
o Respiratory system
o Skin system
o Digestive and excretory systems
o Muscle and skeletal systems
o Reproductive system and development
o Evolution

* Organic chemistry
o The covalent bond
o Molecular structure and chemical spectra
o Isomers and Stereochemistry
o Separations and purifications
o Hydrocarbons
o Oxygen containing compounds
o Amines
o Biological molecules
o General Concepts in organic chemistry

* General chemistry
o Electronic structure and periodic table
o Bonding
o Phases and phase equilibria
o Stoichiometry
o Thermodynamics and thermochemistry
o Rate Processes in chemical reactions - kinetics and equilibrium
o Solution chemistry
o Acids/bases
o Electrochemistry

* Physics
o Translational motion
o Force and motion, gravitation
o Equilibrium and momentum
o Work and energy
o Waves and periodic motion
o Sound
o Fluids and solids
o Electrostatics and electromagnetism
o Electronic circuit elements
o Light and geometrical optics
o Atomic and nuclear structure
o Basic concepts and general techniques

So yes, MCAT is knowledge based, LOTS of knowledge,

Then you get asked questions like this:

The nucleus of a tadpole intestinal cell is removed and transplanted into a denucleated frog zygote. The zygote develops normally after the transplant. The experimental results suggest that:

A. cell differentiation is controlled by irreversibly repressing genes not needed by the cell.
B. cell differentiation is controlled by selectively repressing genes not needed by the cell
C. the cytoplasm of the zygote contains all of the information needed for normal adult development in the form of RNA
d. the ribosomes found in the nucleus of the zygote are the same as those fund in an adult frog

So quite obviously LOGIC plays a role as well.

To any of you who are suggesting that the SAT > MCAT, gimme a break...

 

[Margaux1985]

I've taken all the standardized tests (MCAT, GRE, SAT, ACT, and studied for the LSAT) and here's what I think in terms of difficulty:

Easiest: SAT = GRE (both are essentially the same test) < ACT < MCAT < LSAT : Hardest

In terms of studying for the exam, I think the MCAT is the most straightforward (but longest) to study for since you know what subjects are going to pop up. The LSAT on the other hand, is the most difficult and most nebulous to study for. It makes the SAT logic test look like a game of tetris. I can probably pull off a 90th percentile on most of the test but with the LSAT, I'm having difficulty reaching the 50% mark. The LSAT is one of the reasons why I probably won't be applying to law school.

 

[brritscold]

Then you get asked questions like this:

The nucleus of a tadpole intestinal cell is removed and transplanted into a denucleated frog zygote. The zygote develops normally after the transplant. The experimental results suggest that:

A. cell differentiation is controlled by irreversibly repressing genes not needed by the cell.
B. cell differentiation is controlled by selectively repressing genes not needed by the cell
C. the cytoplasm of the zygote contains all of the information needed for normal adult development in the form of RNA
d. the ribosomes found in the nucleus of the zygote are the same as those fund in an adult frog

So quite obviously LOGIC plays a role as well.

The level of logical thinking required to answer that kind of question is different from (and, arguably, lower than) the level of logic tested on the LSAT through either the logical reasoning or analytical reasoning (aka "logic games") sections. What makes that kind of question intimidating is all the bio vocab that you have to know to understand what's going on; once you know what terms like "zygote" and "repressing genes" mean, and how things like transcription and basic cellular development work, then it's pretty simple.

Overall, the MCAT is much more knowledge-based than either the LSAT or SAT. There is some logic involved, but that's inasmuch as you could say anything in biological science/medicine involves logic, or anything in any worthwhile intellectual endeavor, for that matter. I think what trips up more people is the fact that the MCAT is passage-based, and therefore the questions are a little more screwy in terms of where you have to get the necessary knowledge from, unlike similar tests like the DAT/OAT where the questions are more straightforward like MCAT discretes.

 

[Innokus]

So yes, MCAT is knowledge based, LOTS of knowledge,

Then you get asked questions like this:

The nucleus of a tadpole intestinal cell is removed and transplanted into a denucleated frog zygote. The zygote develops normally after the transplant. The experimental results suggest that:

A. cell differentiation is controlled by irreversibly repressing genes not needed by the cell.
B. cell differentiation is controlled by selectively repressing genes not needed by the cell
C. the cytoplasm of the zygote contains all of the information needed for normal adult development in the form of RNA
d. the ribosomes found in the nucleus of the zygote are the same as those fund in an adult frog

That's how an MCAT question is formulated? Excellent, it looks like it's from my Bio 2 exam. Screw those who say Biology is just memorization. And D.

 

[bozz]

I

So yes, MCAT is knowledge based, LOTS of knowledge,

Then you get asked questions like this:

The nucleus of a tadpole intestinal cell is removed and transplanted into a denucleated frog zygote. The zygote develops normally after the transplant. The experimental results suggest that:

A. cell differentiation is controlled by irreversibly repressing genes not needed by the cell.
B. cell differentiation is controlled by selectively repressing genes not needed by the cell
C. the cytoplasm of the zygote contains all of the information needed for normal adult development in the form of RNA
d. the ribosomes found in the nucleus of the zygote are the same as those fund in an adult frog

So quite obviously LOGIC plays a role as well.

To any of you who are suggesting that the SAT > MCAT, gimme a break...

Sure... but that question can still be answered by knowing what a zygote, nucleus, and genes are. Somebody with a little extra knowledge has an advantage. But with tests like the LSAT that test pure logic, it doesn't matter how much knowledge you have... everyone's placed on the same playing field and you depend more on your natural abilities.

 

[Margaux1985]

Then you get asked questions like this:

The nucleus of a tadpole intestinal cell is removed and transplanted into a denucleated frog zygote. The zygote develops normally after the transplant. The experimental results suggest that:

A. cell differentiation is controlled by irreversibly repressing genes not needed by the cell.
B. cell differentiation is controlled by selectively repressing genes not needed by the cell
C. the cytoplasm of the zygote contains all of the information needed for normal adult development in the form of RNA
d. the ribosomes found in the nucleus of the zygote are the same as those fund in an adult frog

So quite obviously LOGIC plays a role as well.

To any of you who are suggesting that the SAT > MCAT, gimme a break...

The answer's (B) right? 🙂

(A) Is wrong because if cell differentiation is controlled by irreversibly repressing gene not needed by the cell, then the zygote would never develop normally since the nucleus is from a developed cell.
(C) Is wrong because the cytoplasm does not contain any of the genetic information needed for protein synthesis and without the nucleus, the cell would have no means of encoding any of the enzymes, organelles or cell components.
(D) is wrong because ribosomes generally don't exist in the nucleus of cells, they exist in the cytoplasm or ER.

See I haven't touched a biology review book or MCAT exam in three years and I still remember how to figure out these types of questions. As long as you did well in your pre-requisite classes and figure out a method to this maddness, you'll have no problems answering these types of questions on the exam even if you never want to study again in your life.

 

[brritscold]

That's how an MCAT question is formulated? Excellent, it looks like it's from my Bio 2 exam. Screw those who say Biology is just memorization. And D.

um... I think the answer's "B." just IMO though

 

[nikeshp]

That's how an MCAT question is formulated? Excellent, it looks like it's from my Bio 2 exam. Screw those who say Biology is just memorization. And D.

just browsing this topic saw this question, and now was wondering if anybody would care to explain a bit why it is D.

EDIT: nevermind, by the time i posted this, there were other explanations. why is it B specifically though? I see why it can't be any of the others.

 

[bozz]

I'd much rather study for the MCAT than the LSAT b/c it's easier to study for the MCAT.... I feel like I'd just give up after a certain point ... trying to answer questions like this:




An amusement park roller coaster includes five cars, numbered 1 through 5 from front to back. Each car accommodates up to two riders, seated side by side. Six people&#8212;Tom, Gwen, Laurie, Mark, Paul and Jack&#8212;are riding the coaster at the same time.

• Laurie is sharing a car.
• Mark is not sharing a car and is seated immediately behind an empty car.
• Tom is not sharing a car with either Gwen or Paul.
• Gwen is riding in either the third or fourth car.

Which one of the following statements CANNOT be true?
[SIZE=-3].[/SIZE]
(A) Neither Tom nor Gwen is sharing a car with
........ another rider
(B) Neither Mark nor Jack is sharing a car with
........ another rider.
(C) Tom is sharing a car, and Jack is sharing a car.
(D) Gwen is sharing a car, and Paul is sharing a car.
(E) Tom is sharing a car, and Gwen is sharing a car.

 

[nikeshp]

A? that was fun

 

[brritscold]

just browsing this topic saw this question, and now was wondering if anybody would care to explain a bit why it is D.

EDIT: nevermind, by the time i posted this, there were other explanations. why is it B specifically though? I see why it can't be any of the others.

The question asked what was suggested by the experimental results, which were: a nucleus from a differentiated cell that was transplanted into an undifferentiated cell allowed that latter cell to develop normally (I suppose technically this is a single experimental result, and this whole question should be posed in the singular rather than the plural, though that's being nitpicky...). This suggests that even though the intestinal cell was differentiated, its DNA still had the potential to give rise to all the other differentiated cells of the developing organism --> i.e., the DNA is in common between all the different cells of the organism, but what makes them different is the fact that they're just transcribed differently. You can get different transcripts from the same DNA sequence by repressing different genes; the transplanted intestinal nucleus had that repression "turned off" (so that it's "reset," or in other words, so it could be "turned on" again later on in development in different ways) once it was in the zygote. Hence... B.

 

[paradocs we are]

Having written all 3 tests (SAT, MCAT and LSAT), I believe studying for the LSAT was less overwhelming than studying for the MCAT, simply because you didn't have to worry about "discretes" questions and frankly, those discretes matter if you want to hit a high score because every point counts on the MCAT. As for the passages on the MCAT and the passages on the LSAT, there are strategies on how to tackle those, strategies that increase your overall score.

Ultimately, if I had a choice, I'd retake the LSAT any day over the MCAT simply because the MCAT tests so much more than just logic and pacing skills: knowledge and endurance (!). Also, I scored better on the MCAT simply because YES, it is knowledge-based and anything familiar is likely to be seen as easier to tackle and that sets for a much better mental attitude on the exam.

 

[Innokus]

Woah! Apparently I need to learn how to read. My answer is the single reason why VR is held so highly by Adcoms.

 

[TehDoc]

Troll

 

[supertrooper66]

I've taken all the standardized tests (MCAT, GRE, SAT, ACT, and studied for the LSAT) and here's what I think in terms of difficulty:

Easiest: SAT = GRE (both are essentially the same test) < ACT < MCAT < LSAT : Hardest

In terms of studying for the exam, I think the MCAT is the most straightforward (but longest) to study for since you know what subjects are going to pop up. The LSAT on the other hand, is the most difficult and most nebulous to study for. It makes the SAT logic test look like a game of tetris. I can probably pull off a 90th percentile on most of the test but with the LSAT, I'm having difficulty reaching the 50% mark. The LSAT is one of the reasons why I probably won't be applying to law school.

the ACT is harder than the SAT? are you kidding me? the ACT is the easiest test i've ever taken. i have heard the GRE is a more advanced SAT, so in other words, it'd be hard to improve your score. you wouldn't have to study too much for it, tho. you either have it or you don't for that test.

the MCAT is straightforward to study for. i think it requires the MOST studying since you KNOW you can do better the more you study, which makes it annoying since you could always keep going. the LSAT definitely sounds like the hardest one and the hardest to improve on. again, you either have the skills or not for the lsat.

so, all in all, i think the MCAT takes the most time to study for while the LSAT is the hardest.

 

[bcat85]

My father is a physician, and while nobody is going to forbid me to do anything, he strongly suggested I go to law school instead of med school.

The problem is, if I became a lawyer, I would have to throw myself in front of a train.

Right.. i was of course being facetious. My dad did not actually forbid me from doing anything, rather he basically told me that I would want to, as you said, throw myself in front of a train after four days of being an attorney.👍

 

[deleted128562]

I'm not an expert since I haven't taken both.... but....

I would argue that the MCAT is not in fact a "logic" test the way the LSAT apparently is. Think about all the folks over on the MCAT forum who say/ask things along the lines of "I'm scoring 12-14 in BS and PS on my practice tests, but can't get above 7 on VR. What do I need to do?" I've seen A LOT of those threads. What does this indicate? In my opinion it indicates that one can do quite well on BS and PS by memorizing, memorizing, memorizing and learning material. This of course is not true of VR.

Exhibit B: My wife, who has a bachelor's in a nonscience field, took one of my practice MCATs for fun once. Scored 12 on VR. Couldn't break a 6 on the other sections. Did her logic just disappear on the science sections? (Yes, my wife and I are nerds).

 

[supertrooper66]

I'm not an expert since I haven't taken both.... but....

I would argue that the MCAT is not in fact a "logic" test the way the LSAT apparently is. Think about all the folks over on the MCAT forum who say/ask things along the lines of "I'm scoring 12-14 in BS and PS on my practice tests, but can't get above 7 on VR. What do I need to do?" I've seen A LOT of those threads. What does this indicate? In my opinion it indicates that one can do quite well on BS and PS by memorizing, memorizing, memorizing and learning material. This of course is not true of VR.

agreed! i started off automatically getting 10s on the VR. i haven't gotten 12-14s yet on the sciences, but i also haven't studied the sciences in depth yet. makes me happy because i take that as i'm smarter than the ppl getting ridiculous science scores but simply lazier so don't get the science ones. haha

 

[ChubbyChaser]

who cares which is harder...they all pretty much have a bellshaped distribution.


Besides you can easily get into law school scoring sub 50%ile on the LSAT...but good luck getting into med school with less than 75%ile

 

[SaveThisLabRat]

All I can say is, the LSAT is fun. I've tried a few practice questions and they were seriously fun. I considered going to law school for the simple fact that I could do so much better on the LSAT than the MCAT.

I don't see where the SAT comes into any of this. That's an exam for high school students.

 

[WinterLights]

The verbal reasoning section of the MCAT is difficult not because you have to use logic to figure out the answers, but because you have to thoroughly understand the passages and then extrapolate conclusions based on that. If you can't comprehend the passage (due to difficult wording, atypical sentence structure, etc.), then you will be hard pressed to get a high score on this section. I think that the other two sections require as much logic as the verbal section, if not more.

 

[Tyc00nman]

well let me ask you guys this...are you more impressed with someone that can retain a vast amount of information or someone that can figure out a complex problem using deductive reasoning?

I only brought the subject up because my sister just took the last and got a 170 on it. She said she to a diagnostic cold 2 months prior to it and got a 166. About two weeks before the actual tests she was hitting 171/172. Her argument was that the LSAT was harder than the mcat...in fact, much harder. She took all the pre-med courses as an undergrad and said that with about 2-3 weeks of review she'd be able to do fairly well on the mcat. whereas on the lsat she said it would take her ALOT more practice to even get close to a 175-180

 

[ChubbyChaser]

well let me ask you guys this...are you more impressed with someone that can retain a vast amount of information or someone that can figure out a complex problem using deductive reasoning?

I only brought the subject up because my sister just took the last and got a 170 on it. She said she to a diagnostic cold 2 months prior to it and got a 166. About two weeks before the actual tests she was hitting 171/172. Her argument was that the LSAT was harder than the mcat...in fact, much harder. She took all the pre-med courses as an undergrad and said that with about 2-3 weeks of review she'd be able to do fairly well on the mcat. whereas on the lsat she said it would take her ALOT more practice to even get close to a 175-180

Im more impressed with someone who can retain knowledge and apply it logically to random questions and passages youve never seen before.

 

[Tyc00nman]

👍

Im more impressed with someone who can retain knowledge and apply it logically to random questions and passages youve never seen before.

 

[p30doc]

I would argue: a successful troll > MCAT > LSAT > SAT as far difficulty goes.

Its relevance to you all depends if you want to work under a bridge, in a hospital, in a court room, etc.

 

[Tyc00nman]

I would argue: a successful troll > MCAT > LSAT > SAT as far difficulty goes.

Its relevance to you all depends if you want to work under a bridge, in a hospital, in a court room, etc.

Hey whats up with this troll thing? are people suggesting i am a ghoulish creature that collects and harasses people crossing a bridge?

 

[Character]

well, all 3 of the exams are products of the "the man" in their diabolical scheme to oppress the advancement of my people.

 

[eeyoreDO]

um... I think the answer's "B." just IMO though

B

I know this first-hand, as I was cloned from Abraham Lincoln's hair found in his pen... my life sucks